Karl Marx criticized capitalism on the basis that capitalism favored a rich minority at the expense of the poor masses. He advocated for a proletarian revolution that would demolish the capitalist system and replace it with a system that would favor equality in society (Bacher 2007 p.2). This system was the communist system. Communism and socialism are closely related in that both systems advocate for the abolition of a capitalist system and the establishment of a centrally planned economy and ownership of property.
The difference is that while socialism advocates for wealth distribution based on the individual’s hard work, communism postulates that wealth should be distributed based on the needs of the people. Karl Marx did not live to witness the fault in his proposed ideal system as evidenced by the collapse of the USSR and the current political state in china. This proves that socialism and communism have their major weaknesses. Although capitalism favors inequality, private ownership of property is an important part of economic growth. Socialism does not support exponential economic growth but caters to the social welfare of the people (Bacher 2007 p.15).
A centrist approach that would favor economic growth and at the same time cater to the welfare of the society would be ideal for the governing of any society. Using a socialist/communist and capitalism mix is possible and has proven to be helpful in some countries while in other countries it has had detrimental effects. A positive example of this mix is Israel, where socialism is dominant in the rural areas and capitalism, is dominant in the urban areas, this has led to an increase in the welfare of the rural folk and at the same time economic growth. Rural China is riddled with communism and urban china is capitalist this has greatly contributed to income disparity in China.
In recent years the Chinese economy has grown exponentially making it one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. However, regardless of this growth there exists a large disparity between the incomes of the urban dwellers and the rural folk. The urban dwellers have higher incomes as compared to the rural folk because they are professionally trained and have better jobs as compared to the uneducated peasant farmers in the rural areas (Folsom et al 1992 pp. 76–77).
The goal of the communist party was to abolish the differences in income by implementing policies that would favor wealth distribution. However, some of the policies only worsened the income disparity, for example, the imposition on barriers on rural to urban migration has made it difficult for the people living in rural areas to find well-paying jobs in the cities. Barriers imposed on selling or mortgaging land have made it difficult for the poor to secure capital.
The Chinese communist party has monopolized the political arena and further controlling the majority of the spheres in the society. The governing party has violated civil rights by dictating the number of children a Chinese couple can have as well as controlling which shows are to be aired on television (Folsom et al 1992 pp. 72–85). It becomes ironic that the communist party aimed at abolishing capitalism but eventually became a symbol of capitalism in itself.
As China grows there will be more demands on civil and political freedom. We can see that the communist party is slowly losing its credibility with the people largely because of its authoritarian leadership styles, restrictions in civil rights and political freedom as well as corruption in the government. These problems could eventually lead to the downfall of the communist party as did the Soviet Union.
References
Bacher, Christian. (2007). Capitalism, Ethics and the Paradoxon of Self- exploitation. Munich: Grin Verlag.
Folsom, R. H., Minan J. H. & Otto, L. A. (1992). Law and Politics in the People’s Republic of China. Eagan. West Publishing Co.